Hi! My name is Kidus. I scored a 175 on the June 2026 LSAT after over a year of self-study. My diagnostic was a 151. I managed to leave the 150s relatively early after only a couple of months of study, so I was stuck in the 160s for the longest time. Eventually, after working to perfect my LR for the better part of a year and doing just about all the available official LR questions (and some logic games for fun), I managed to get a 99th percentile score. I believe I could have reached my goal much earlier with personalized support and that's what I'm offering. Please don't hesitate to reach out if you're interested in my services.
Discussions
Hi everyone! I started tutoring the LSAT recently after scoring a 175 on the official test and I would like to take on more students. If you’re looking for a tutor, here’s why I think I could be of help -
I started with a 151 diagnostic and self-studied to a 99th-percentile score. In the process, I’ve read many of the big-name textbooks out there, I’ve done almost all of the official PTs (including PTs 1-18) and some logic games for good measure, so I am aware of various approaches to this test and will share exactly what worked for me with you in significant detail.
My review process is very thorough. I don’t just try to find out why students chose a wrong answer and why they didn’t choose the right one. I am committed to helping them figure out how every wrong answer choice figures in or relates to the argument or the fact set. This increases the takeaways from every missed question and the lessons from doing just one question can carry over to different question types.
Simply put, this strategy helps identify what students are doing wrong and how they can improve. I observe how students go about solving specific question types and come up with useful insights, drills and tips to avoid making similar mistakes. Students have told me that this approach has been helpful.
I will only charge after you’ve become convinced of the importance and quality of my services so the first session will be a free, actual tutoring session and not just a consultation. We can chat about your diagnostic, your prep journey thus far and specific parts of the test that you need help with in the DMs so that once the call starts, we’ll hit the ground running with targeted drills.
Let’s talk! DM me and if you think I’d be a good fit for you, we’ll book a call.
Hi Rachel! I think I can help. We can do a few level 4 and 5 questions and figure out habits/approaches that might be holding you back from getting those few points that you need to reach your goal. I have a 175 official and was consistently PTing in that range. Let me know if you're interested.
Hi! I'd love to help. I think conditional reasoning is my forte. My approach would be to go through level 4/5 questions that heavily feature conditional reasoning to expose gaps in your understanding of similar questions and hopefully fix them with specific tips. DM if you're interested!
You're trending in the right direction. Keep at it, take a couple more PTs, figure out where your misses are coming from and drill to break past the LR plateau. If you don't see improvements after doing this, maybe then consider tutoring.
Was in a similar position during my prep journey. Strengthen, weaken and resolve were my bane and textbooks don't have much to say about them specifically.
For strengthen and weaken questions
Having a very specific sense of the conclusion is a non-negotiable. You can actually notice how easily they write tricky wrong answer choices by writing answer choices that weaken/strengthen a definitive argument...except that wasn't the point the speaker in the stimulus was making. It's tough to notice this trend because textbooks/explanations gloss over these answer choices by saying they're irrelevant (which is true but not particularly helpful).
The correct answer choice will almost never strengthen/weaken any of the premises. The rule on the LSAT is that you accept the premises as true. If an answer choice strengthens/weakens an argument's premises, it's most probably not the right answer. Premises are, for the sake of the stimulus, established facts. Accepting this will allow you to eliminate a significant amount of wrong answer choices. Consider yourself an appellate judge that will not contend the truth of the evidence brought before them but the soundness of the reasoning used to justify the judgment of the lower court by using evidence whose truth has already been confirmed. In simpler terms, ask why the premise can't justify the conclusion and for weaken questions, point out that gap/for strengthen questions, fill that gap. (There are exceptions to this, but they are exceedingly rare)
Hi there! I scored a 175 this past June and had a similar prep journey. I was stuck in the 160s for the longest time but eventually made it to the 170s. I know how it feels to get stuck even after putting in a lot of work. If you're interested in free sessions, you can reach out.
@Jordancohen Just sent you a DM